AIBU to agree with Diane Abbott

[Elephantiner]

I cannot stand Diane Abbott, she has a lazy, patronising manner which riles me, but she has said that people visiblybof a different race (e.g. black people) experience a different sort of racism than those who’s race is not visually obvious (travellers, Jewish people etc). She has a point, doesn’t she? Am I missing something here?

Obviously all types of racism are utterly abhorrent.

As a Jewish person of colour, I say that DA is completely wrong. And it upsets me deeply to see the widespread ignorance around antisemitism manifested in this thread, on MN and in society as a whole.

But I am also forever grateful to those of you who are real anti-racists and see the "subtle" antisemitism around us. Thank you is just not enough in these times.

Who is the white saviour?

A phrase used by the non-white racists, and there are plenty.

As a follow up to my previous thought, I think the problem with Abbott's comment is that she incorrectly assumes that racism against Black people is the worst form of racism because it's automatically based on the person's appearance (skin colour).

What she doesn't comprehend, because she is not Jewish or not from the Traveller community is that there are other factors which may be linked to appearance or the way in which a person in question conducts themselves that will make their heritage/faith immediately clear to others and make them vulnerable to racism in exactly the same way.

What she also fails to understand is that racist attitudes fluctuate depending on time in history. It is entirely wrong of her to assume only racism against the Black community is systemic. Racist attitudes towards both, the Jewish community and the Traveller community have been embedded since forever, and in fact at present there is a high risk of exposure to racism especially for the Jewish community because of the political situation - attitudes are inflamed. Racist is embedded in respect of all of the above communities, sadly. But the reality is that the risk of exposure to it for the relevant community and the racist attitudes spike or decrease depending on what is happening at any given time. These concepts are not mutually exclusive.

Thus, it is wrong of her (and of anyone) to compare the experience of a number of groups that isn't her lived experience because she doesn't belong to them.

It is also wrong of her to even suggest racism against one group is worse for any reason - racism is wrong full stop, there is no hierarchy of victims here which is what she essentially means.

I actually think what she said, consistently, is inherently racist.

“What she also fails to understand is that racist attitudes fluctuate depending on time in history. It is entirely wrong of her to assume only racism against the Black community is systemic”
Absolutely.

Good post.

But the reality is that the risk of exposure to it for the relevant community and the racist attitudes spike or decrease depending on what is happening at any given time.

I don't think this is true.

Black people are always the most targeted in stop and search.

Black people are 16 times more likely to be prosecuted under joint enterprise than white people.

Black students in some contexts face disproportionately high rates of poverty, discrimination, and systemic inequalities.

I'm not black but even I can see that the racism against black people is consistent and systemic beyond what any other community (including my own) experience.

But in her interview she didn’t say that she said the article she wrote was incorrect and was not what she meant.

she expressly didn’t use the words hierarchy of racism. She said that visible difference can make racism more immediate and thus different.

as explained if a brown person and white Jewish person are walking down the street. Without religious identifiers one is noticeably different than the other.

I don’t get why everyone is pretending this isn’t he case. And adding in extra words that were not said.

I thought @Dangermoo is white?

Did you read @Longingdreamerpost?

The way I read it is that you understand racism against black people but not other kinds of racism. It is clear that there is a lack of understanding about eg antisemitism from reading your post. Always good to understand one's biases and lack of knowledge.

I read the post of the person I responded to.

I experience racism directly so I don't need your patronising comments.

But I still have eyes and ears and can see what's happening around me and I know that black people experience racism systemically on a level that no other community does, including my own.

All racism is abhorrent and all races are capable of being racist to other races. Diane Abbott clearly apologised in the past only in order to be able to stand as Labour Party candidate in the last GE. She's a liar because she's now backtracked on her apology and doubled down on her original comments. Having done and achieved so much as a black woman in politics this is a sad end to her career.

You are definitely right about that, nomas.

Not sure how my post saying how antisemitism on here and in real life and the legal definition of traveller are often questioned even if defined in law and giving the experience of MY family was deleted.

It seems to me that DA's comment is reductive and simplistic.

People who can easily be identified as part of a certain group will find that people respond to that in a way that will not be quite the same with someone who is not obviously a member of a defined group.

What that actually looks like in either case will vary a lot.

It's foolish to think the only way people are identifiable as "other" is skin colour. There are also other ways, ethnicity can be visible other ways, cultural indicators, accent.

And the response to skin colour isn't uniform or universal. I don't think people from the Caribbean are seen in the same way as people from southern India, or Korea, for example.

Thanks for further proving my point. Much appreciated.

Thanks LBF

I think Diane Abbott has received so much horrendous racial abuse over the course of her career it has distorted her perspective .
I don’t think she should be castigated or suspended. Instead I think her statements should be used as a useful way to bring to light misinformation/ misunderstandings about racism.
I hope that she will issue a clarification and apology

She was wrong and as she represents Hackney, home to London’s community of Hasidic Jews, who ARE instantly recognisable as Jews, and in the current awful antisemitic climate, she was disgustingly wrong.
And to ignore the Holocaust in her letter only a decade earlier, talking about Black people’s treatment in 50’s America, is pretty unforgivable.

Re: rape of white girls and systemic racism. The police and council seemed to be in the pockets of the rapists; some were also in positions of local power themselves. So I think they created their own anti-white system which operated outside of our own laws and systems.

I don't seem to remember people being rounded up and sent to work/concentration camps because they have red hair....

Yes - I agree .
I do think her own experiences have distorted her understanding - her Jewish constituents must feel very let down and angry ( particularly in the current climate)
Its sad because in other respects she has done a lot of good

I don't think you understand what systemic means.

Nope. It wasn't racist at all. And you suggesting there is a 'hierarchy' of racism proves my point. There us no hierarchy. By saying that, you're minimising the feelings of all other none black groups who suffer awful racism and prejudice. Their feelings are equally as traumatising to them as those suffered by black people. Your comment is disgusting.

Here you go @nomas does it alter your earlier view at all?